photographing minis... (kind of long)

>G'day Don,
>
>>Anyone have some good tips
>>on taking pictures of figs?
>
>I haven't done a lot of this, but I've heard that the mini straight on
the
>scanner with a black cloth behind works pretty well. I'm also sure a
few of
>the other guys around here could give you some good tips with regard to
>cameras though (i.e. use tripod, don't get too close etc.)
>
>>  It doesn't actually answer your questions about ship designs, but it
does
>>answer what the fleet looks like. . I guess. :-)

Hi there!

here's a topic that you could write volumes about...

There are many good books out there about photography, but a couple of
tips:
(I'm assuming that you want to take photos close up of single or small
groups of figs for display purposes, and you aren't just snapping shots
of
games in progress for memory sake)

also please note I'm not a pro photographer, and if what I say doesn't
work
for you, please don't send me a letterbomb or something... :)  This
stuff
has worked for me, but I can't really "guarentee" it...

1.  Lighting is all important.

If you are taking pictures for display (in a book, on a webpage, etc)
you're probably going to be working indoors.  Most people have either
incandescent (regular light bulbs) or fluorescent lighting in the places
they game.  Incandescent light is very yellow/orange, and fluorescent
light
is typically very green/blue.  Your eyes (well, your brain actually) is
a
great colour compensator and balances out the light when you see it, but
a
camera doesn't.  If you want to work under "normal" lights like these,
unless you take some precautions, your pictures will come out either
yellowish or greenish - certainly it will mess with the colours you've
painted your miniatures.  I'm going to assume you're working with a 35mm
SLR type camera (interchangeable lenses, etc) because if you're working
with a "point and shoot" there's not much you can do, other than
purchasing
"indoor" type film.  With 35mm cameras, you can purchase a variety of
filters which will compensate for the type of lighting you're using and
balance the colours out.  This isn't too expensive (I purchased one for
about $25 Canadian to compensate when shooting under incandescent
lights).
Ideal situation is to have proper "studio" type lighting - which is
balanced as "daylight" ie full-spectrum light.	Of course, studio
lighting
costs a bundle, so most of us don't have that kind of equipment.  If you
can purchase lightbulbs for your regular lights that are called
"daylight"
bulbs, this will go a long way toward getting better results. 
Fluorescent
lights are a nightmare for photography, and I'd stay away from them as
much
as possible, unless they are of the "daylight" type...	

One trick that works well, if you can get the right stuff:  Garden
centres
and other home product suppliers sometimes sell lights for use in your
garden called "Tungsten Lights".  Tungsten lighting is used by
photographers also, though their equipment is of professional quality. 
If
you can buy tungsten lights (or even tungsten lightbulbs from a lamp
supplier) then you can get good results.  The real trick here is that
you
have to purchase Tungsten balanced film.  If you use tungsten film and
tungsten lights, you don't have to mess with filters, etc.  Any good
film
supplier, camera shop, etc should carry tungsten balanced film, and the
tungsten garden lamps are usually quite inexpensive, and the ones I saw
came with a stand.

You want lighting that is non-directional, if possible.  This will
eliminate/reduce shadows.  Nothing worse than setting up a nice shot on
a
miniature and getting the prints back only to find that detail was
obscured
by a shadow that you didn't notice or didn't see.  Always remember that
what the camera sees is totally different than what you see, even if you
are looking through the camera's viewfinder.  If you use a spotlight on
a
figure, you will get highlights on raised surfaces and shiny areas, and
often these highlights will look completely different on film than they
do
to your eyes.  Unless you are doing something very "arty" and are
attempting to get sparkles or something, you want to avoid this kind of
thing as much as possible.  It is better to use indirect lighting to
flood
the scene.  One way of doing this inexpensively is to surround your
photo
table (or whatever you are putting the minis on while shooting) with
white
board, and shine your lights at the white boards.  Art stores sell
"illustration board" which is good for this.  Or use big sheets of white
paper, though that's harder to position well.  Angle the boards so the
light is reflected back onto the scene.  Use several lights pointing in
different directions, so the scene is flooded with light from different
directions.  This will largely eliminate shadows and "hotspot" type
highlights.  Pros use what's called a "lightbag" - which is an inflated
bag
that is attached to the front of a spotlamp.  The bag has a large,
rectangular front which is of a white material.  This diffuses the light
from the spot lamp, and if you suspend one of these over your scene,
will
light up the picture evenly without the highlights.  You can get
"amateur"
versions of these relatively inexpensively if you're keen.

If you're using a flash on your camera, point the flash up or to the
side,
and reflect the flash back on the scene using one of the white
cards/boards.  If you are measuring distance for the flash ('cause
you're
keen) remember to measure the total distance to the object including the
reflection, rather than just from camera to object.  If not doing any
measuring, then set the flash to a slightly higher setting, to account
for
light "lost" to the board, reflected off at other angles, etc etc.

One good and *inexpensive* way to get good pictures with "perfect"
quality
lighting is to take them outside during a sunny day, at mid-day when the
sun is overhead.  If you have that option, you don't have to worry about
lighting at all.  You just have to make sure that your exposure settings
on
the camera are set so you don't overexpose the shot, and that there
aren't
any shadows interfering with your area of interest.

2.  Lenses.  I own a 70 - 210 mm zoom lens for my 35mm camera, and it
has a
"macro" function.  Macro lenses are designed for close up work, and can
focus on an object only a couple of inches from the lens.  The problem
with
the macro function on my lens is that it has a fixed focus, ie you set
the
lens to macro, and then you have to move the camera (and lens) to get
the
picture in focus.  This is difficult to do with a tripod.  The other
problem with this type of feature is that it has a very narrow "depth of
field" - ie the point of focus sits about 4" in front of the lens, and
anything that is more than about 1/4" closer or further away from that
point is out of focus.	I've taken pictures of models where the head is
in
focus and the feet aren't, or the front of a vehicle is in focus, the
middle is blurry, and the back is completely out of focus - on a jeep
model
only 4" long.  You can use this type of lens for close in shooting, but
it
is better to get a proper Macro lens.  This is a lens specifically
designed
for close in work, and you won't be able to use it to take pictures any
further away than a few inches from the camera.  But for the close in
stuff, it will have a much deeper depth of field, and will let you take
good close up shots of miniatures in which the whole figure is in focus.
Unfortunately, I can't offer any tricks for faking one of these.  

3.  Tripods.  If you are taking pictures with the shutter speed slower
than
1/60 sec, or maybe 1/30 sec, you want to use a tripod or you will get
blurry pictures as your hands shake.  If you are using a flash, you
probably don't want to take a picture with shutter speed any faster than
1/30th or so - or the shutter will be partially closed when the flash
goes
off.  I've hand-held the camera with a flash at 1/30th sec, and it
worked
fine.  You just have to make sure the exposure is set properly or the
picture will end up over/under exposed.  That's a topic for one of those
photography books, but re the tripod, if you have your camera set
properly
(ie at least 1/30th sec shutter speed) you can get away without one.  If
using a macro lens, it is better to have a higher shutter speed and lots
of
light to get a good exposure, and that way you can hold the camera close
to
the subject without a tripod.  Another gadget you can get inexpensively
to
aid in this are very small "table top" tripods.  I've got one with legs
that are about 8" long.  It makes for a stable platform, and you can get
in
really close to something on a table.  Personally, I prefer to use a
higher
speed shutter setting, and hold the camera in my hands, but it all
depends
on the lighting.  If you don't have strong lighting, you can still take
good pictures by using a slower shutter speed, but you then must use a
tripod.

If you have a decent lens or two (like a macro) and have a flash, you
can
take very respectable pictures at conventions, during games in progress,
etc.  I have a few of games, demonstrations we've run here in Toronto at
cons., etc that actually turned out quite well, even though they weren't
"set up" shots.  My 70-210mm zoom lens works well for taking zoomed in
shots of action happening on the table during a game.  Again, you can
work
with colour balancing the shots under convention lighting (often
fluorescents) by adding a filter (I suggested a filter for incandescent
lights above - they also make filters to colour balance fluroescents) to
your lens.  Getting the right combination of film, lighting, camera
settings, etc in a convention setting is a bit of a crap shoot - because
the lighting in those places is often awful.

Last piece of advice - be prepared to take a lot of pictures to get a
few
good ones.   Some pros will figure on getting 1 good picture per roll of
film shot.  I don't have the $$$ to work with that kind of ratio, but
you
can't be afraid to actually take pictures.  You won't get the settings
and
lighting correct the first time, so take several shots.  Professionals
will
do what they call "bracketing", which is where they set up a picture,
figure on what they think the correct camera settings are, take a shot,
and
then take two more, one slightly more exposed, one slightly less
exposed.
That way, they figure *one* of the pictures will come out ok.

Last last piece of advice.  If you want to get really good pictures,
write
down what you're doing for each shot.  Not in huge detail, but just the
subject, lighting and camera settings, and film used.  That way, you can
look back over the pictures when developed, and see what worked, what
didn't.  When you go back to do it next time, refer to the pics that
worked
and your notes, and set the situation up the same way.

This turned out to be a bit longer than I had intended.  Sorry :)

Good luck!

Adrian